A silent crisis is brewing in appellate courts in India. The salutary rule that an appellate court should respect the finding of facts by the trial court is crushed frequently. Of course, an appellate court has powers and duties to correct the trial court, but how often and for what causes to correct as a norm shapes the appellate powers of courts. The cultural ideas of colonial times were that "lower courts" were run by mouffsil judges, who could not be trusted to know law as well as the English judges of High Courts, has continued. This has led to a culture of uncontrolled correction of lower courts by higher courts even on factual findings. Frequent corrections even at trial stage by higher courts is a critical reason for delays in courts. Where no statutory appeal or revision exists, High Courts routinely use Art.227 to correct trial courts. Such interventionist judicial appellate culture leads to delays in Indian courts. Respecting the trial court's finding on facts is a basic rule of judicial discipline. It is illuminating to see how rest of the common law world considers this aspect.